If you are 23 or older when AA or win NCAAs

[fishbane]

10 hours ago, Holtfan said:

Why does it matter how old someone is when they compete?  If someone takes 10 years off from competition, doesn't that put them at a disadvantage?  

But......

To Be the Man, You Gotta Beat the Man. 

 

In professional sports and athletics at large it doesn't.   College athletics are activities for students to do whilst pursuing their education.  Running minor/professional sports leagues is not part of the mission of any university.  With all the money that's come into college sports and NIL, absolutely if the NCAA eliminated limits like 4 years of competitions, 5 year clock, 1 year grace period for enrollment, professionalism, ect there absolutely would be individuals that remain in college competing for 5-10 years and marginally pursuing education simply to stay eligible or former professionals that retire and go back to school for the competition or money earning potential and not education.  It makes sense that college and universities agreed to set limits so they don't end up accidentally running professional sports leagues and detracting from their primary mission.  Unfortunately, the current rules are only somewhat effective. Yes, a person who takes 10 years off and then goes back to school and wants to wrestle isn't what the rules are intending to stamp out, but its sufficiently rare to begin with that they shouldn't try and work the rules around it and there are always the lower divisions.

Lower divisions have different rules for eligibility.  Someone who wrestled in high school and took 10 yeas off would be eligible to wrestle D3 as there the eligibility clock stops when not enrolled.  There have been several instances of athletes competing in their 30s in D3.  The lower divisions generally don't have the money incentive of D1 nor the platform, so the thinking is it should not be abused in the way that it could be in division 1.

[fishbane]

3 minutes ago, Antitroll2828 said:

The main thing holding a kid back in 8th grade does is just make them more ready for high school wrestling , it has pros and cons…I was young for a 9th grader and got my ass beat by a lot of older dudes all year long , had a losing record and almost quit ( I didn’t have close to a losing record any year pre high school, the rest of high school , nor in college ) so that really rocked my confidence and being an adult now I know I would’ve greatly benefited from staying back that year like some of my teammates did , and it would probably have helped 4 later when I get to college as well 

Are you talking purely athletically or do you feel it would have helped your educationally and professionally too?  Is wrestling part of your profession today?  If not do you think winning a more matches in 9th grade and possibly a few more throughout the rest of high school/college would have been worth delaying the start of your career a year or two?

[Antitroll2828]

19 minutes ago, fishbane said:

Are you talking purely athletically or do you feel it would have helped your educationally and professionally too?  Is wrestling part of your profession today?  If not do you think winning a more matches in 9th grade and possibly a few more throughout the rest of high school/college would have been worth delaying the start of your career a year or two?

Education wise I was fine , but that’s more just blessed with genetics memory wise  , socially I definitely could have used another year to mature as well  …and while wrestling isn’t my main job I do coach a few times a week ..Its not so much the wins and loses , it was the confidence part that took a beating , took 2 full years to get back to where I was confidence wise going into high school and not going to lie I was pretty much depressed for a year straight..wrestling went from my favorite thing in the world to something I didn’t even want to do anymore..I don’t think staying back is for everyone in my opinion  , I think it comes down to each individual kid but some it definitely benefit's some 

[LJB]

my oldest wrestled in his first HS state tournament while still being 13 years old... he was almost a full size 6lber...

my youngest was still wrestling tourneys at his walk around weight of 83lbs the winter before what would have been his first year of HS... we held him back... wrestled one year of HS then quit to focus on real wrestling...

everyone has a slightly different path...

[Holtfan]

3 hours ago, fishbane said:

In professional sports and athletics at large it doesn't.   College athletics are activities for students to do whilst pursuing their education.  Running minor/professional sports leagues is not part of the mission of any university.  With all the money that's come into college sports and NIL, absolutely if the NCAA eliminated limits like 4 years of competitions, 5 year clock, 1 year grace period for enrollment, professionalism, ect there absolutely would be individuals that remain in college competing for 5-10 years and marginally pursuing education simply to stay eligible or former professionals that retire and go back to school for the competition or money earning potential and not education.  It makes sense that college and universities agreed to set limits so they don't end up accidentally running professional sports leagues and detracting from their primary mission.  Unfortunately, the current rules are only somewhat effective. Yes, a person who takes 10 years off and then goes back to school and wants to wrestle isn't what the rules are intending to stamp out, but its sufficiently rare to begin with that they shouldn't try and work the rules around it and there are always the lower divisions.

Lower divisions have different rules for eligibility.  Someone who wrestled in high school and took 10 yeas off would be eligible to wrestle D3 as there the eligibility clock stops when not enrolled.  There have been several instances of athletes competing in their 30s in D3.  The lower divisions generally don't have the money incentive of D1 nor the platform, so the thinking is it should not be abused in the way that it could be in division 1.

I am not talking about spending 10 years in NCAA D1 competing. 

I am asking this:
What competitive advantage does a 31 year old who hasn't competed in 10 years have over a 21 year old who is likely in his second season in college and hasn't taken time away from competition?  Some say "man strength", but I'm not buying that. You don't automatically get stronger just because your are x-years old than someone. Sure, when you are comparing a 13 to 23 year old.  But a 23 to 33 year old?   

Now---start adding into this people who choose to enroll in military service right out of school, and after they do 4-6 years there, decide to go to college. Should we automatically state that they are unable to compete in D1, simply because of age?  I know there is certain criteria for when the D1 "clock" starts---missions, military, etc---but should it really matter?  What if I graduate HS and decide I want to go to work building cars?  And then 10 years down the line, I decide I want to go back to college and get a degree......am I not allowed to enroll in a D1 school and attempt to compete, simply because of the "clock" rule? If I can make the team and compete, shouldn't I be allowed to do so? 

I will go back to what I said initially----to be the man, you have to beat the man. I don't care if the man is 18 or 28......and there should never have to be an asterisk following any NCAA Champ's name. 

Just my view from the cheap seats.......

[LJB]

12 minutes ago, Holtfan said:

I am not talking about spending 10 years in NCAA D1 competing. 

I am asking this:
What competitive advantage does a 31 year old who hasn't competed in 10 years have over a 21 year old who is likely in his second season in college and hasn't taken time away from competition?  Some say "man strength", but I'm not buying that. You don't automatically get stronger just because your are x-years old than someone. Sure, when you are comparing a 13 to 23 year old.  But a 23 to 33 year old?   

Now---start adding into this people who choose to enroll in military service right out of school, and after they do 4-6 years there, decide to go to college. Should we automatically state that they are unable to compete in D1, simply because of age?  I know there is certain criteria for when the D1 "clock" starts---missions, military, etc---but should it really matter?  What if I graduate HS and decide I want to go to work building cars?  And then 10 years down the line, I decide I want to go back to college and get a degree......am I not allowed to enroll in a D1 school and attempt to compete, simply because of the "clock" rule? If I can make the team and compete, shouldn't I be allowed to do so? 

I will go back to what I said initially----to be the man, you have to beat the man. I don't care if the man is 18 or 28......and there should never have to be an asterisk following any NCAA Champ's name. 

Just my view from the cheap seats.......

i routinely watch and/or get updates of a 17 year old that trains with a 29 year old world team member and i can wholeheartedly tell you "man-strength" is real and extremely effective...

like throw your way better technique out the window the minute i grab ahold of you extremely effective...

 

having said that...

you are 100% correct when you intimate that whining about that gap is nothing more than an excuse mentality...

you wrestle whoever steps out on that mat...

 

and i will not even comment on how pathetic the "asterisk" crowd is...

there are some painfully average "fans" who want to put an "asterisk" on a world/olympic championship for any myriad of reasons...

it literally makes me want to punch a baby...

[Holtfan]

13 minutes ago, LJB said:

i routinely watch and/or get updates of a 17 year old that trains with a 29 year old world team member and i can wholeheartedly tell you "man-strength" is real and extremely effective...

like throw your way better technique out the window the minute i grab ahold of you extremely effective...

 

Yes, but that 29 year old World Team member continued competing. But I get your point....I am just wondering if it's really that much of a difference between a 21 and a 25 year old.   

And to the rest of what you said, I wholeheartedly agree!

[LJB]

anyone whining about the differences between a 21 and 25 year old should just be patted on the head and sent back to the children's table...

[Wrestleknownothing]

45 minutes ago, LJB said:

i routinely watch and/or get updates of a 17 year old that trains with a 29 year old world team member and i can wholeheartedly tell you "man-strength" is real and extremely effective...

like throw your way better technique out the window the minute i grab ahold of you extremely effective...

 

having said that...

you are 100% correct when you intimate that whining about that gap is nothing more than an excuse mentality...

you wrestle whoever steps out on that mat...

 

and i will not even comment on how pathetic the "asterisk" crowd is...

there are some painfully average "fans" who want to put an "asterisk" on a world/olympic championship for any myriad of reasons...

it literally makes me want to punch a baby...

 

My hero, Erik Hinckley wants to know where he can get some of that old man strength.

 

 

 

[LJB]

man strength and OLD man strength are wildy different...

ask me how i know...

 

now if you will excuse me i am due to stub my toe on the weights that have been tossed casually in the corner years ago...

don't cry for me argentina, there is a enough dust on them to soften the blow to curly that i will probably only cry like an old woman for a couple of minutes...

[Smsu150]

On 1/26/2023 at 10:40 AM, jagger712 said:

You'd be hard-pressed to find many 17 or 18 year olds in college wrestling when most are nearly 19 when they graduate high school

Been a second. But in the 80's and 90's, it was not uncommon for someone to be 17 when they graduated high school.  To your point, it's not the case today, but the feeling at the time, when you had to wrestling someone older than the age of 23, was that the 23+ person was had an advantage.  Again, that was then.  There was no medical redshirt that I can remember., no Olympic redshirt, no Covid year, almost no gray-shirting and mostly 18 year old freshmen. 

 

[fishbane]

1 hour ago, Holtfan said:

I am not talking about spending 10 years in NCAA D1 competing. 

I am asking this:
What competitive advantage does a 31 year old who hasn't competed in 10 years have over a 21 year old who is likely in his second season in college and hasn't taken time away from competition?  Some say "man strength", but I'm not buying that. You don't automatically get stronger just because your are x-years old than someone. Sure, when you are comparing a 13 to 23 year old.  But a 23 to 33 year old?   

Yeah I mostly agree.  A 23 year old training continuously should on average have the advantage over a 31 year old that was 10 years retired and doing something else entirely.    I think this is allowed to some degree with the current D1 rules.  Famously retired NBA player JR Smith was ruled eligible to play D1 NCAA golf.  He had never previously attended college having joined the NBA straight out of high school and had never played golf professionally.  If JR Smith wins an NCAA golf championship there shouldn't be an asterisk on it even though it would be much more interesting than the average college gold champion. 

So a 21 year old who never enrolled in college and had not trained in wrestling in 10 year might well be allowed under the rules to wrestle D1.  But why change rules to allow a allow a 31 year old that competed D1 for two years to take 10 years off and then return and wrestle two more years?  I'm fine with this person's D1 career being over.  They can still wrestle D2/D3 if they go back to complete their educaiton.

[fishbane]

18 hours ago, RYou said:

I'd hazard a guess he entered military service which qualifies for waiver on your eligibility clock.  Lots were volunteering for military services to avoid being drafted into the Army.  ....and there were those that enlisted in the Army.

Yeah, I thought the dates were a little too early for the Vietnam draft but it could have been voluntary military service. The 5 years off is just one of the interesting facts about this career though.  There are many aspects that make it fairly unique.

1. Two-time NCAA that never won a state title in high school.  There can't be very many of those. Keith Gavin is a 1x champ that did that.  Don't know any other 2, 3, or 4xers off the top of my head.  
2. A multi time NCAA champion that transferred schools.  There can't be too many of those. TJ Jaworsky, Nick Suriano, Brent Metcalf, Cary Kolat.
3. A multiple time NCAA champion that won a subsequent title at a lower weight than a previous title.  There are only 7 of those. Nick Suriano also among them.
4. An NCAA champion that took multiple years off in the middle of their college career.  Nick Suriano, Max Dean, and Yianni D. didn't wrestle in NCAA competition for two consecutive years.
5. Winning NCAAs at the age of 26 years 7mo puts him amongst the oldest NCAA champions.  The oldest is Charlie Jones who was 27 when he won a title in 1993 wrestling for Purdue.

[Antitroll2828]

14 minutes ago, fishbane said:

Yeah, I thought the dates were a little too early for the Vietnam draft but it could have been voluntary military service. The 5 years off is just one of the interesting facts about this career though.  There are many aspects that make it fairly unique.

1. Two-time NCAA that never won a state title in high school.  There can't be very many of those. Keith Gavin is a 1x champ that did that.  Don't know any other 2, 3, or 4xers off the top of my head. 

Ed ruth never won a state title but was 3 ncaa champ , and Burroughs was a 1x state champ but 2x ncaa 

bruce baumgartner never made a state final but was ncaa champ 

Edited January 27, 2023 by Antitroll2828

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

13 minutes ago, Antitroll2828 said:

Ed ruth never won a state title but was 3 ncaa champ , and Burroughs was a 1x state champ but 2x ncaa 

bruce baumgartner never made a state final but was ncaa champ 

Ed Ruth wrestled for Blair, correct?  At least at the end of his high school career? He probably didn't have the opportunity while at Blair, unless he wrestled in NJ preps.  (Is that actually considered a state tourney?)

[fishbane]

26 minutes ago, Antitroll2828 said:

Ed ruth never won a state title but was 3 ncaa champ , and Burroughs was a 1x state champ but 2x ncaa 

bruce baumgartner never made a state final but was ncaa champ 

Ed Ruth didn't win a PIAA title, but he won national preps his senior year (2009).  It's true he didn't win PIAA 9-11th grades, but isn't exactly that I had in mine.  Baumgartner is a good one.  

[fishbane]

6 hours ago, Antitroll2828 said:

Education wise I was fine , but that’s more just blessed with genetics memory wise  , socially I definitely could have used another year to mature as well  …and while wrestling isn’t my main job I do coach a few times a week ..Its not so much the wins and loses , it was the confidence part that took a beating , took 2 full years to get back to where I was confidence wise going into high school and not going to lie I was pretty much depressed for a year straight..wrestling went from my favorite thing in the world to something I didn’t even want to do anymore..I don’t think staying back is for everyone in my opinion  , I think it comes down to each individual kid but some it definitely benefit's some 

Yeah no doubt individual considerations will be important and retrospectively it's easy to look back and see how it might have helped, but I also think that holding a wrestler/student back in 8th grade is almost never consistent with getting better at wrestling or more generally any sport.  One could look back and think that they would have won more matches in high school/college being held back a year, but that could simply be measuring yourself against a different set of peers.  If you look at yourself and make the goal to be the best 15 year old wrestler, or 19 year old wrestler, or any age wrestler that you can be has progress really been made against that standard?  Or in other words, two identical wrestlers finish 8th grade.  One stays back and repeats 8th grade.  The other goes to 9th grade and wrestles at the high school.  Who is the better wrestler?  If you have them wrestle at the end of the year who do you think wins?  Who has learned more academically?  If given the same standardized test who does better?

Do you think if you had stayed back and repeated 8th grade that you at the end of 8th grade for the second time could have beaten the real you after 9th grade?

[LJB]

You guys do realize that exponentially more kids are held back in this country who don’t even play sports than those that do…

The social advantages are very real and it is not hard to see how an early advantage can be carried all the way through life…

[fishbane]

During the Iowa-PSU broadcast on BTN they said that 1/28 is RBY's 24th birthday.  After graduating high school in 2018 at 19 years old he wrestled as a true freshman at PSU in the 2018-2019 college season.  His career has been 8-COVID-1-1-?.  In an upcoming Flo film he talks about how his grandfather held him back in 8th grade because he thought he was a little bit small to be a 106lb.  He said he did nothing, just stayed home for a whole year, trained, and played video games everyday.  RBY was 182-0 in high school.

[Le duke]

Won’t Chittum be 25 when he graduates, without an extra year from
COVID?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fishbane]

1 hour ago, Le duke said:

Won’t Chittum be 25 when he graduates, without an extra year from
COVID?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not sure.  I think 20 is about the oldest a normal track student should be upon graduation from high school.  If he graduates at 20, then redshirts and wrestles 4 years that could make him 25 his 5th year in college.  Alternatively, if he graduates high school at 19, then does a grey shirt/gap year before enrolling full time, and uses a redshirt in his career it can happen.

In theory an individual could delay enrolling in elementary school until the oldest compulsory age which would have them turning 20 some time during their senior year of HS.  That person could then defer enrolling in college for 1 year whilst continuing to wrestle with a club/RTC and not sacrifice any eligibility.  They could then take a redshirt and up to two Olympic redshirts during their college career (assuming timing works out and they qualify) along with 4 years of competition.  Such a person could turn 27 before NCAAs their senior/4th year of college competition.  A person could break the record and be the oldest ever NCAA champion doing that.  No need for injury waivers, pandemics, repeating grades they had already passes, intentionally failing grades, religious missions, military service, or time away from training/competition.

[scourge165]

On 1/26/2023 at 5:41 PM, Dark Energy said:

Enter school as 17/18

enter senior year as 20/21

Why can’t they let alumni compete on team?  Why should it even matter if person isn’t an active student?   Let them wrestle!  Stupid rules / constraints.
 

 

I entered College having just turned 18. My roommate had just turned 20(he was actually about 28 months older). 

He was held back in Kindergarten and then had a horrible period in his life where he was forced to live in Foster care for 18 months, they didn't send him to classes(whole lot more to the story that's not mine to tell...even anonymously) and he had to repeat 6th grade. So he was on the older side going into school, held back a year, then...family issues. I was on the younger side.

I redshirted. By the end of my RS FR year, I was 19, he was 21 at the end of Feb. 

Soph 22, Jr 24, Sr 25

 

Not much different than a medical redshirt or an Olympic. We're adults by this age. I don't think wrestling a 24 year old puts me at a great disadvantage as a 21 year old.

Also...life ain't fair. What about kids who don't enroll right away. Not sure what they want to do. Are we stripping their chances? 
 

[scourge165]

On 1/27/2023 at 7:59 AM, fishbane said:

Are you talking purely athletically or do you feel it would have helped your educationally and professionally too?  Is wrestling part of your profession today?  If not do you think winning a more matches in 9th grade and possibly a few more throughout the rest of high school/college would have been worth delaying the start of your career a year or two?

If I could answer this as I was a 17 year old Sr by graduation...I think being held back another year would have been extremely beneficial. Not socially(athletically of course)...but academically. Also just maturity. Particularly if it would have been after 8th grade. I got into a pretty good accident in 8th grade, missed half the year, got a tutor and then feel so far behind in math, it took me 4 years to catch up at all and even then in College, I needed the air of tutors to help me with Calc and a couple other classes.

Might not have made a difference....but Math is THAT class, once you fall behind, it's so hard to catch up. 

 

Actually, if I was a dictator, I'd make every kid who didn't have a plan of becoming a lawyer, Doctor, Engineer, some field like that, I'd force them to spend 2 years of service. Not with a gun(though...they could). But just doing bitch work. Digging ditches, being the grunts. Maybe a little learning a trade. way too many kids look down on that now like it's NOT now the easiest path to the American dream and a 6 figure salary without the six figure student loan debt.

But it wasn't until I was 2 1/2 years into school and already close to finishing one of those "athlete" majors that I actually started to really enjoy the academic side of College. Enjoy learning. Luckily, I was able to become a grad assistant, I found something that I actually enjoyed. That should be another factor.

That's a little side tangent, but we call this MEN'S Wrestling, MEN'S athletics. It's not Boys Wrestling any longer like in HS. 

As long as you're legally eligible, you're eligible. Who cares how old they are. I'd say we saw the worst of a few Iowa guys last year because they were so beat to hell after 7 years of Wrestling, but...it was legal and I couldn't fathom putting an asterisk next to Kemerer's NC(had he stayed healthy and...managed to get one) because he was older. I just don't care. 

[1032004]

On 1/27/2023 at 4:30 AM, jackwebster said:

Maybe, but those sort of shenannigans are a mug's game. Holding-back goes along with all the other fantasy mongering perpetrated by folks like the Manville clan. Those fools spend more money angling for f*cking nonexistent wrestling scholarships than it would take to get their kid a couple of tutors and pay for an ivy league education outright.

Tell us how you really feel, lol

Edit:  also didn’t Mason have an ROTC scholarship or something?

Edited January 29, 2023 by 1032004

[jackwebster]

2 hours ago, 1032004 said:

Tell us how you really feel, lol

Edit:  also didn’t Mason have an ROTC scholarship or something?

Yeah. That was harsh. I guess I've heard one too many kids telling their teachers, friends, family that they a going to get a scholarship in wrestling. It's not lottery odds, but it not as easy getting a pair of Travis Scott's at retail.